When I read "round table" I anticipate, in fact, something more like an informal meritocracy; inevitably, some people involved will be more active contributors in various areas (administration, research, teaching etc.)

This is the second US-based HEMA/WMA collective to be founded this year, the first being made up of the ex-ARMA groups a few months ago. Good thing? Bad thing?

This is the second US-based HEMA/WMA collective to be founded this year, the first being made up of the ex-ARMA groups a few months ago. Good thing? Bad thing?

I haven't heard much about the first since the whole break happened. There was a tempest that has quickly dissipated into a gentle breeze on the distant horizon.

I would have liked the two orgs to join efforts, personally. Two (more) competing orgs will give the community an even more fractured feel On the other hand, I'm not sure it's that big a deal. Most folks are used to having more than one martial arts org in the same general area. Look at how many different Tae Kwon Do and Judo orgs there are.

I haven't heard much about the first since the whole break happened. There was a tempest that has quickly dissipated into a gentle breeze on the distant horizon.

I would have liked the two orgs to join efforts, personally. Two (more) competing orgs will give the community an even more fractured feel On the other hand, I'm not sure it's that big a deal. Most folks are used to having more than one martial arts org in the same general area. Look at how many different Tae Kwon Do and Judo orgs there are.

Actually, HEMA Alliance and WMAC compliment each other. They aren't in competition in any way, and a person/group can be a member of both. ARMA this isn't.

WMAC is more akin to an informal federation bringing groups together for events. HEMAA has shifted its focus from a new and improved, non-totalitarian ARMA-style group to a community-wide service org, providing training materials, a group insurance plan, publishing outlets and other resources to groups. HEMAA has fallen quiet in recent months because it obviously takes a lot more behind-the-scenes work to launch a service org than it does to simply declare oneself a loose association.

A new pan-American association based on the Historical European Martial Arts Coalition (European) model. Don't know too much about the politics behind this one ...

DDLR,

I wish as a newly joined member of the WMAC I could speak more to its' politics, but alas I cannot. Being far "out of the loop" in the greater HEMA/WMA community and its' politics, I am blissfully ignorant of such matters, and have been given the impression that I can remain that way as a member.

The CLAIM is that it is "round table" so that every one will have "equal voice."

My experience is that this never is true. There's always some people who have more weight with the council when they talk and there always seems to be some "unofficial" leader.

Having been in scientific academia for a while this is the way things tend to fall out, "leaders" tend to arise from out of the group over time, whom others tend follow. As long as members cannot be "forced" against their will, as opposed to "won over" things work well, discovery and developments will keep coming. The danger is placing too much weight on arguments from authority, as opposed to logic, reasoning and empirical evidence and trying to squelch the efforts of the newer "equals" in the group.

Originally Posted by lklawson

I wish them luck but I think they've got an uphill battle to keep petty politics out.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Yes, human nature being what it is...

Originally Posted by DdlR

When I read "round table" I anticipate, in fact, something more like an informal meritocracy; inevitably, some people involved will be more active contributors in various areas (administration, research, teaching etc.)

As long as the less productive members, can fairly "piggy back" off of the efforts of the more productive, and pick and choose from what is being presented, I don't see that as problematic in the least.

Originally Posted by DdlR

This is the second US-based HEMA/WMA collective to be founded this year, the first being made up of the ex-ARMA groups a few months ago. Good thing? Bad thing?

As I mentioned before, being completely oblivious to the greater world of HEMA/WMA, I have no idea (I don't think anyone could really predict anyway). The only thing I know is that so far WMAC membership does not require one to leave any other affiliations.

From a purely personal and selfish point of view, WMAC is looking to start a regularly occurring seminar/gathering here in Houston, my backyard, so it is a "good thing", having something like that in my hometown.

I would actually encourage both of you to be vocal with any other constructive criticisms you may have. I respect both your opinions very much and would take your inputs very seriously.

As long as the less productive members, can fairly "piggy back" off of the efforts of the more productive, and pick and choose from what is being presented, I don't see that as problematic in the least.

Me neither, I think it's a very effective way for this sort of association to operate.

As I mentioned before, being completely oblivious to the greater world of HEMA/WMA, I have no idea (I don't think anyone could really predict anyway). The only thing I know is that so far WMAC membership does not require one to leave any other affiliations.

From a purely personal and selfish point of view, WMAC is looking to start a regularly occurring seminar/gathering here in Houston, my backyard, so it is a "good thing", having something like that in my hometown.

I would actually encourage both of you to be vocal with any other constructive criticisms you may have. I respect both your opinions very much and would take your inputs very seriously.

My take is that these associations tend to coalesce, do some good work and then eventually splinter/re-coalesce. IMO the diversity is generally a good thing, but it's a shame when it comes at the cost of human relationships, which unfortunately tends to be the case.

My least-favorite aspect of the process is that it can encourage an "us and them" or even "us vs. them" mindset. For example, a new association will often be formed because of a political/personal bust-up, but then the "new politics" that arise out of the original split can be passed on as (formal or otherwise) dogma to members of the "next generation". I saw it in the '80s, when I was a member of the World Tae Kwon Do Federation and there was a sort of unspoken assumption that the International TKD Fed. was "the enemy" - ridiculous, considering that the original split in that case was a decades-old feud originating in Korea. At worst, the assumption is the old school-yard, "oh, he's their friend - I guess I can't play with him any more". Its nonsense, but it happens all the time.

Anyway, as I said, the diversity is ultimately a good thing, and I wish WMAC well.